I have mixed feelings about the governor of New Jersey, but this does make me like Chris Christie just that much more:
Andrew Sullivan has part of the transcript up:
[L]et us reclaim the lives of those drug offenders who have not committed a violent crime. By investing time and money in drug treatment – in an in-house, secure facility – rather than putting them in prison. Experience has shown that treating non-violent drug offenders is two-thirds less expensive than housing them in prison. And more importantly – as long as they have not violently victimized society – everyone deserves a second chance, because no life is disposable. I am not satisfied to have this as merely a pilot project; I am calling for a transformation of the way we deal with drug abuse and incarceration in every corner of New Jersey.
The rest is here. If only more people on the left and the right would start talking this way.
Reihan Salam writes:
I want all politicians, and in particular all conservatives, to pay careful attention to this: Christie highlighted a dangerous gap in the system that limits the discretion of judges to keep violent offenders behind bars. Yet he also made the case that nonviolent drug offenders should be given treatment rather than imprisoned because (1) it is cost-effective, (2) it is decent and humane, and (3) it recognizes that we can’t afford to waste human potential.
By leading with a “punitive” strategy (actually, a commonsense strategy — it’s about preserving discretion) and then pivoting to a measure that will help members of a marginalized population, Christie demonstrates his political sophistication, his strategic vision, his guts, and his decency. This is a big deal.
Possibly. It’s certainly a welcome brand of conservative politics. But will it really appeal to other conservative politicians? In states where the drug war is far more popular than in New Jersey, I doubt this line of reasoning is going to resonate. Furthermore, most politicians aren’t Christie and can’t pull off the tough and sincere thing the way Christie can.
Salam points out that “Christie evidently doesn’t believe that taking this stand will limit his political future” writing that “his brand of conservatism can form the foundation of a coalition that captures centrist voters even in a heavily urban, diverse northeastern state.” Which is exactly why he doesn’t think this will hurt his political career. The fact that Christie is working to appeal to New Jersey voters means he doesn’t think it will hurt him with said voters. And national voters are going to be a lot more sympathetic to this line of thinking, if polls are to be believed, should Christie run for president someday.
Salam guesses that one reason Christie didn’t run for president this time around was the work he has remaining in New Jersey, noting that “ building a solid foundation there could be a great help if he does indeed pursue a national career.”
I think it’s more likely that Christie is simply very good at reading the political winds. He knew he’d be up against a formidable opponent in Romney and an even more formidable opponent in Obama. It’s harder to go after an incumbent than it is to run at the end of the other party’s two terms. Any sensible observer would see how bad the odds are in 2012 and Christie is nothing if not a savvy politician. 2016 is a better year for Republicans, and I think Gingrich and/or Romney will learn this the hard way.
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
The problem that I have with CC is the way he handled the ARC Tunnel thing, not only did he cancel a much needed project, but he also lost millions of funds that were already allocated by the feds and got sued for it.
His points against it, while may be valid, were never a foundation for an argument and he dismissed the project without setting forth an alternative.
The main reason of the cancellation was the risk of cost overruns, he was afraid that NJ was gonna be liable for them, yet NJ Transit was the main user of the line, therefore it was intended as a commuter first tunnel. Which is highly needed now.
He never set up a dialogue to either get more funding from the feds or from NY with some kind of track sharing agreement or something, he also lied about it going to a station to nowhere, where it was to be connected to the new Penn Station Moyniham project.
And don’t get me started with him yelling at teachers.
So, although this is a good start, he still has a long way to go in many people’s books.
Eddie, I agree. That was a bad call and counts against Christie for sure.
In California, anyway, taking this stand wouldn’t work without being willing to take on the prison guards union, who actively and effectively advances the drug war and a pro-incarceration agenda. Christie is on record for this, so he just might be able to pull it off. .
Precisely. This is one of many powerful players standing in the way of meaningful reform.
You call this “meaningful reform”?
So, essentially – “We keep the ‘War on Drugs’ full steam ahead, but now we’ll just be throwing these people into state-run psychiatric wards instead of prison.”.
This has “Nanny State” written all over it. It certainly does nothing to actually _remedy_ the absurd war on drugs.
Yes, it’s a meaningful step. You don’t suppose it will all end at once, do you? That the Berlin Wall comes down all by itself with no baby-steps on the way?
Well a step right off a cliff or headlong into a moving bus is “meaningful” also…
Here’s more direct means of ending the absurd war on drugs, which _doesn’t_ include just simply expanding the prison system:
* Take victimless ‘crimes’ off the books entirely
* Remove marijuana from its Schedule I classification of the Controlled Substances Act
_That’s_ an example of “meaningful steps”. This crap you’re supporting Gov. Christie, quote: “By investing time and money in drug treatment – in an in-house, secure facility – rather than putting them in prison.”
In an in-house, secure facility.
Basically, Gov. Christie is saying: “hey, our prisons are filling to the brim with petty offenders… so instead of simply arresting _less_ people… we’re just going to _expand_ the prison system… “in-house, secure facilities”. New openings for the prison guards union! New ‘secure facilities’ contracts! It’s just more pork for the State, under a thin veil of “we care”.
Governor Christie has taken “a meaningful step” directly towards the _wrong_ destination.
{ 1 trackback }